adjust account cancellation procedure.
When an individual who has been with AOL for approximately 20 years and desires to change master screen names, calls AOL, and gets the agent authorization to do so, and request that the old Master Screen name be deleted from the account,.then the agent handles the change from SHIRTPOCKETSTUFF to *****. The agent tells the customer all is ok and the customer begins using *****s a master screen name, and a few years later the customer begins to notice that he is being double billed. When the customer calls AOL to inquire as to the double billing, he is told that the system had been changed and that OLD MASTER SCREEN NAMES have been re-integrated back into the system but as an INACTIVE SCREEN NAME,
The customer, double checks the MASTER SCREEN NAME ******* and notices that ****has been placed into the **account. The customer then asked if that could possibly be the cause of the double billing and the AOL Agent tells the customer that ***** had been relegated back to MASTERSCREENNAME status and so I had two (2) master screen names and that they had every right to bill me for both . The customer points out that a few years back an AOL AGENT had made the switch to ******** at the request of the customer and the name ******* be deleted. The customer was informed by the AOL Agent that HE would check into the problem and get back to the customer. The customer is never contacted by ANY AOL AGENT but continues to be double billed. Numerous calls and emails to AOL never produced any corrections to the problem, nor any correspondence. The customer goes to his banker and ask that the re-occurring AOL payment be stopped. The banker then tells the customer to get in touch with the merchant. The customer informs the banker that he had been trying to get the problem corrected for years. The banker picks up the phone, calls AOL, speaks briefly to AOL and hands the phone to the customer. The AOL agent gives the customer ONE ( 1 ) CANCELLATION CONFIRMATION number of 3290017 and informs the customer that the number applies to all AOL services. The customer leaves the bank, believing that the problem was corrected. The date was Dec 17, 2017. In Jan 2018, the customers bank is again billed for AOL and services. The customer sends an e-mail to a **** or Nixon at OATH Hqs. Some days later, the customer gets a letter from a Mr Brunsweiger. A couple days later, Mr Brunsweiger calls the customer. The customer informs Mr Brunsweiger that he was continuing to be billed. Mr Brunsweiger ask if the customer had purchased a Vault Lock. The customer replies, Yes, I wanted to protect the account as much as possible. Mr Brunsweiger informs the customer that AOL would be responsible for the cost from Dec 2017 to Mar 2018 but since the customer had purchased a VAULT LOCK from AOL, the customer had re-initiated the account. The customer ceases any contact with AOL/OATH.
The customer has Online discussions with AOL representatives and discerns that AOL's records indicated that both SCREEN NAMES had been created in 2005 and that the first time ********* used online was in 2011. The customer ceases any further contact with AOL or OATH and initiates actions to notify The US Chamber of Commerce, The Better Business Bureau, and Verizon
When the customer attempts to pay an outstanding balance of $9.98 owed to AOL and is informed that he must produce another payment method. The customer, having used that same bank account since 2005, could see NO REASON to produce another method of payment. Furthermore, OATH now requires that each screen name be closed separately even though there is one master screen name and 6 sub screen names applied to the same account. So yes, AOL/OATH should adjust their account mechanics.
Anonymous
shared this idea